US will invade Iran in '06

page: 37
0
<< 34  35  36    38  39 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Neither option is feasible. Anyone advocating an attack on Iran is mad and should be fired immediately. Our involvement with Iraq has so cripled our military's ground forces that the last thing on earth we should be doing is picking a fight with Iran. Its tantamount to military suicide.

I have come to expect this from the incompetent, inexperienced NeoCon fantasists. These people have never served a day in their lives. They have no concept of the military and what it takes to fight effectively. Not to mention, with honor. That is a foreign concept to them.

Its horrifically sad for me to say this, but I now have the same amount of contempt for our leaders, as well as Blair and Howard, that I had for my enemy Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War.




posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
A carrier group is now on its way to the Persian Gulf. Two scenarios being floated:


Eisenhower isn't the only ship in recent news. Boxer strike group with the 15th MEU is on its way over there. Anyone wanna do the grunt work on how frequent/regular these events are and make a guess on the likelihood of it being routine?

I'm assuming for the moment that it is routine... it's not as if somebody gets invaded everytime a US carrier or MEU puts to sea, but I would entertain the idea if anyone wanted to actually get detailed.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Hello Vagabond, welcome to my gloom and doom thread.


I was referring to an entire battle group redeploying to the Gulf (last week). I'm sure we can agree, when something of that nature happens, something's up. What that something is, only time will tell, in this case.

I hope this Foleygate crap slows down any momentum towards conflict with Iran there may be.

Mark my words, right here, if we attack Iran, they will HAVE to restart the draft. That is a certainty. No matter how unpopular it is. This bunch in power does not care what you and I think. About anything.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Eisenhower isn't the only ship in recent news. Boxer strike group with the 15th MEU is on its way over there. Anyone wanna do the grunt work on how frequent/regular these events are and make a guess on the likelihood of it being routine?


While I havnt been able to find any links if my memory serves ne correctly the USN maintains a carrier group in the South China Sea in order to deter North Korea from invading its southern neighbour. Note the US hasnt invaded North Korea despite the Carries being in the region.

Personaly I dont understand why people are making such a big fuss but on the other hand the Bush admin has proven that it is as far removed from reality as is possible which gives people a reason to be concerned.



posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11


While I havnt been able to find any links if my memory serves ne correctly the USN maintains a carrier group in the South China Sea in order to deter North Korea from invading its southern neighbour. Note the US hasnt invaded North Korea despite the Carries being in the region.

Personaly I dont understand why people are making such a big fuss but on the other hand the Bush admin has proven that it is as far removed from reality as is possible which gives people a reason to be concerned.


Right now with the rhetoric heating up between N. Korea and the South over testing issues, and our bellicosity, we're not gonna pull any hardware out of that theater. This situation is about a future occurence.

There are plenty of open sources discussing these options and actions.



posted on Oct, 9 2006 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Now more than ever, I feel an attack on Iran is imminent. The GOP is imploding and Bush is under attack from all quarters over the Iraq debacle. An electoral tsunami is heading Washington's way. The BushCons have no other avenue to run down.

Here's a bit of analysis I read earlier. I wholly agree with it.



by Dave Lindorff, co-author of "The Case for Impeachment"

BREAKING NEWS: Eisenhower Carrier Group Sails for Iran Theater

The nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Eisenhower and its accompanying strike force of cruiser, destroyer and attack submarine slipped their moorings and headed off for the Persian Gulf region on Oct. 2, as I had predicted in a piece in The Nation magazine a few weeks back.

The Eisenhower strike force, according to my sources, is scheduled to arrive in the vicinity of Iran around October 21, at the same time as a second flotilla of minesweepers and other ships.

This build-up of naval power around the coast of Iran, according to some military sources, is in preparation for an air attack on Iran that would target not just Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities, but its entire military command and control system.

While such an attack could be expected to unleash a wave of military violence all over Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and elsewhere against American forces and interests and against oil wells, pipelines and loading vacilities, as well as a mining of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, with a resulting skyrocketing of global oil prices, the real goal of this new war by the U.S. would be ensuring Republican control of the House and Senate.
www.buzzflash.com...



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
Now more than ever, I feel an attack on Iran is imminent. The GOP is imploding and Bush is under attack from all quarters over the Iraq debacle. An electoral tsunami is heading Washington's way. The BushCons have no other avenue to run down.

Here's a bit of analysis I read earlier. I wholly agree with it.


I must disagree completely. I believe there's just no way anybody, except maybe the most extreme diehard supporters of Bush, would support any attack on Iran. They would lose EVERY seat if they did that, more and more Americans are questioning Iraq, and now there's a member of the axis o' evil that has openly tested a nuke, and we're gonna attack somebody, again, who may be trying to get one. No way, Iran is in the clear right now. If there were any plans to go after them, Kim screwed those up good. And the Republicans control is all but lost already, thanks to boy loving perverts and those who cover it up....



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 01:23 PM
link   
A lot of people inside the government support this attack, and a lot of others are against it... the problem is that those who want this attack have the more power... Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, Rice and Israël.

And to instaure draft, they would need a big terrorist attack in the US... maybe even they won't need a draft because the volonteers would come easily.

Wait till a big terrorist attack, or they don't care and they instaure draft, and anybody who refuse go in jail indefintly... and with torture that was legalised... i don't think a lot of people will say no, unless there's a big revolt.



posted on Oct, 11 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Maybe the information I'll provide you is significant....

My brother lives in France, near Calais, last night to 9:30 in the morning, dozens of war planes and bombers from UK flew over his house to south-east.

The last time this kind of thing happenned, it was few days before the Iraq invasion.

This event happenned again today, from 9 in the morning to 3 in the afternoon. This is a big mobilisation... and I don't think UK mobilise his warplanes for fun...

Any comments?



posted on Oct, 14 2006 @ 11:38 AM
link   
I'm more certain than ever that Rove's Oct. surprise will entail some kind of false-flag attack which will be blamed on Iran. A likely target would be an American or Canadian vessle in the Persian Gulf. Possibly a Coast Guard vessel. Rove would spin that as a craven attack on one of our harmless "civilian" vessels. That would be a false portrayal, though. Any Coast Guard vessel deployed to the Persian Gulf is a war vessel.

That Oct. surprise could be any number of things related to an attack on our national security. Someone even discussed the possibility, in Rolling Stone, that Rove might order the president's assassination. Its true. I was shocked to read that, although I am hardly surprised. I wouldn't put anything past Karl Rove. He is without a soul/conscience.

But I digress. I wanted to put up a link to some excellent analysis on the current force build-up in the Persian Gulf. Its something everyone should read and consider. An attack on Iran at this time, in my opinion, would be the most devastating military mistake the United States has ever made. Or could make.

Please read, and share with others:



The Time Magazine article intimates that the operation could result in heavy American casualties.

“The first message was routine enough: a ‘Prepare to Deploy Order’ sent through naval communications channels to a submarine, an Aegis-class cruiser, two minesweepers and two mine-hunters. The orders didn't actually command the ships out of port; they just said be ready to move by October 1 [2006]. A deployment of minesweepers to the east coast of Iran would seem to suggest that a much discussed, but until now largely theoretical, prospect has become real: that the U.S. may be preparing for war with Iran.”12

Award-winning investigative reporter and journalist Dave Lindorff has written;

[Retired] Colonel Gardiner, who has taught military strategy at the National War College [of the United States], says that the [U.S. Navy] carrier deployment and a scheduled Persian Gulf arrival date of October 21 [2006] is “very important evidence” of war planning. He says, “I know that some naval forces have already received 'prepare to deploy orders’ [PTDOs], which have set the date for being ready to go as October 1 [2006]. Given that it would take about from October 2 to October 21 to get those forces to the [Persian] Gulf region, that looks about like the date” of any possible military action against Iran. (A PTDO means that all crews should be at their stations, and ships and planes should be ready to go, by a certain date—in this case, reportedly, October 1.) Gardiner notes, “You cannot issue a PTDO and then stay ready for very long. It's a very significant order, and it’s not done as a training exercise.” This point was also made in the Time article.www.globalresearch.ca...



posted on Oct, 14 2006 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I'll try this again

www.globalresearch.ca...



posted on Oct, 14 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   
The Europe just said they failed a compromise with Iran, so they will push for sanctions... Just in time for around october 21, or the october suprise.

Source



posted on Oct, 14 2006 @ 05:36 PM
link   
I'll be very surprised if the elections pass with nothing happening militarily (with Iran).

I'm reading the book "Hubris" right now, by Michael Isikoff and David Corn. One thing is for sure, when Bush and Cheney get something in their heads (like their obsession w/Saddam), nothing in the world will stop them from using force.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 11:34 PM
link   
lol, are you surprised ECK?

Still think the U.S. will invade Iran in 2006?



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 11:44 PM
link   
NumberCruncher is in a dellusionary state of mind.

No offense meant, sorry for the one-liner.

But i can't do otherwise. My hands.. they move and write the truth. I can't stop them. :/



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by osram
NumberCruncher is in a dellusionary state of mind.

No offense meant, sorry for the one-liner.

But i can't do otherwise. My hands.. they move and write the truth. I can't stop them. :/


And you added that comment to the end of this old thread ....... Why ?

If you accuse me of being dilusional you should back it with links and fact and all that nice stuff.

I could sit here and call you a disorientated sympathyzer and Apologist , but i wouldnt do that with out posting some eveidence .

Peace.



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Well.. that is indeed true. I did not realize that this thread was so old.

Might even be that you changed your mind throughout those 30+ pages? I was looking at page one. o.O

I was simply referring to statements like these:


Originally posted by NumberCruncher
Iran i beleive will be a precision attack war.

Young Iranians enmasse want a regeim change it seems.

The Iranian people arnt the target, there Leadership and WMD ambitions are so there wont really be any Quelling objective.

I think the whole War could virtually be fought with Cruise Missiles, just bomb and bomb and bomb all Military and Political targets, send in Special Forces mop up squads at the most.

----------------------------------------

The USA and Coalition is on a War Path because the Islamofascist Killers have attacked and continue to attack un armed Women and Children, we will destroy the sponsors of Terror.

Iran has this coming if you think you can say that Jews should be wiped off the face of the Earth with Impunity your about to learn and awful lesson in table manners son.

The only harbourer of Lies and Criminal conduct are the Iranian and Syrian state sponsors of Terrorism.

Peace be with you.


There are no clean wars. The word precision war is utopia to relieve the conscience of war-supporting individuals.
Your eternal "Peace" Messages at the end of each War-Supporting opinion are somehow really irritating. Have you been going on like that for 10 months?

If you want to destroy the sponsors of Terror, you must consider destroying the current government of the US and A.

"The only harbourer of Lies and Criminal conduct are the Iranian and Syrian state sponsors of Terrorism.

Peace be with you."

The only thing I've seen from you for what I have been able to read. Is discriminating lies and ignorance.

You do not accept that the Evil is sitting right next to you? In Schools, Universities.. Police-Patrols. You do not realize that you finance Evil directly by your Taxes?

If you are on ATS.. how come you still believe public media?

It just does not make sense.



[edit on 1-12-2006 by osram]



posted on Dec, 1 2006 @ 03:40 AM
link   
Oh i get it, im delusional because i dont conform with your way of thinking ? Ok np, no point in me arguing that with you!

Peace.



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Well I have to admit with 2006 almost gone and no attack (of any serious note from anybody) on Iran yet I have been surprised.

I just wonder if the tide of the recent US elections was just too strong to 'Diebold' and that has taken things away from the planned course (losing Congress I expected but the Senate was a surprise.....and a pleasant one at that).

I can't help feeling that Rumsfeld's going wasn't in the original script......even if all it really amounts to is his remaining a slightly less visible but still hugely influential advisor without the offical title.

Also of note lately has been additional and vocal British caution
(we never were going to be supportive of an attack on Iran but the public utterances about the ME generally have been very different in tone and, IMO, most welcome....especially Blair's recent comments about focusing on and dealing properly to reach a stable and lasting settlement of the Israeli/Palestinian situation.)



[edit on 2-12-2006 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Dec, 2 2006 @ 07:49 AM
link   
The United States cannot afford to start another war.

Your economic outlook is looking like the Soviet Union and i doubt your elected leaders will decided to spend billions (even trillions) on another war that will result the economic crash of your Country.





top topics
 
0
<< 34  35  36    38  39 >>

log in

join